>> 151 years after the battle of gettysburg. lt alonso pushing died in the known as what was pickett's charge.

>> please everybody have a seat. on behalf of michelle and myself, will come to the white house. country s ago, as our struggled for survival. bit ident lincoln was a battle of gettysburg, that was the end for the nation might live.

today the nation that left will pay tribute to some of them. the medal of honour to first lt alonzo cushing. medal must be years after few the action, in some of the extraordinary stories might get lost in the passage of time. i want to thank the two dozen family members which are here. here from palm desert, california who will accept this medal. this story is an integral part of who they are. the whole nation shares their pride, and this story is about who we are. would not have been

possible without the supporters who made this day. thank a ally want to historian. margaret. this story, covered she spent over 25 years researching and writing letters. her voice to ensure received ican soldier the recognition he deserved. he brought republicans and democrats together. to make this happen. on you t, we may call again sometime. (laugh) this medal is more than just about one soldier.

the reflects all relation to the men and to that service the country far longer after the remove their uniforms. laid ially after they have down the leg -- their lives. it is never too late to do the right thing. alonzo cushing was raised by his widowed mother. including three brothers who also fought for the union. poor but highly committed, and her son did not to the position. graduating from west point he was assigned for battery a in the artillery. he fought bravely and made a rotation for his courage.

it was a gettysburg, when emphatically where soldiers battle. it was july 1863, the final day of a brutal fight. fighting etery ridge, the confederate troops, what is known now as picketts charge. with the smoke they could hardly see ahead of him. one cornell after described the and terror which spread. was hit badly wounded. name of r by the to save him ry

today in the attempt. 2000 confederate iinventories -- infantry's advanced. used his own thumb to stop himself burning his fingers. hit the final time, his guts spoke out of him before he hit the ground. alonzo cushing was only 22 years old. letter to his sister, wrote that the bravery of the men was all thanks to the figure of your brother. tombstone at west point says faithful unto death. of our neighbours -- navies

cruises will dedicate to his name. know they could not, gettysburg was a turning point in this war. of nine young ds unsung acts mitting of heroism to free this nation one nation under god. with liberty and justice for all. standing as president here if it wasn't for those courageous americans. one of those eurs who as lincoln says his story is part of a larger american story. the spirit, the courage, the

that he ation, demonstrated lives long after. all those men serving aand that america defends freedom, and alonzo -- help to ck defend. is a continuous on after they leave the battlefield. i will like you to join in for the reading of the citation. united president of the states of america, has ordered in the name of congress that medal of honour to first lt the yet ushing of estates. he distinguished

by acts of bravery in battery a, four us artillery. july a third, 1863. that they forces began position in utious cemetery rig. he refused to leave the battlefield after being struck on the solder -- shoulder. he was struck again after and still refuse to abandon his command. he continued to direct fire into oncoming forces. confederate forces closed in, he was first struck out by enemy bullet. severe casualties and opened gaps between their lives,

impacting the unions possibilities. the reflect great credit among himself. army of the battalion of the united states army. (applause) members of congress join me for this photo.

swing around little bit. got it? (applause) information on charge search picket c-span.com.

the ap writes that he brings experience to the state and local level. to the action coming midterm elections. a brief with reporters in about an hour here and c-span. the cis weekend and band network, more reaction to the midterm elections. saturday night at 8 pm a debate. on saturday 8 pm eight at internet relation.

saturday night at 10 idea of racial progress in america. sunday night, and what makes us human and different to other species. medal of honour the pients reflect on service. sunday night at eight, the 25th anniversary of the fall of the berlin wall. finally tv schedule on c-span.com. send us a tweet, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. video 15 c-span

competition is underway, open to make a dents documentary about the three branches and you. how a policy has affected you or your community. 200 cash prizes for students and teachers. a list of rules on to how to get started. now on the congress midterm election results. how the likely impact on congress. this is about 45 minutes. >> thank you everybody for being here. appreciated for everybody that has come here.

want to t thing we discuss herethe question of whether the next congress will to govern any better than the past. has been re historically unproductive, very little done from both sides. they have to be more efficient night they big question is whether big republican majority in the this congress more likely to come together and agree on things and get the president to sign them. senator snowe. certainly abroad and sleeping the status quo and the destruction of the senate. country people are

fearful of the political paralysis that exist in washington. it is abundantly clear that congress is going to have to move forward and learn how to legislate. compromise and consensus has to be, it is critical. senator mitch mcconnell, said that on his speech. they wanted to restore the senate to what is intended to do. to govern and deliberate and consider. to have robust debate. committee is considering legislation. how to engage on the broad issues that affect this country.

back to te has to go its original. that is the underlying objective. >> does that mean that they will join on things? or will they avoid confrontation. >> i believe the president will be meeting a bipartisan leadership. they are both going to have to work together to develop a political compatibility to the issues that matter to this country. first and foremost they need to find areas of common ground, reaching an agreement on critical issues. most especially when it comes to the economy and the budget. they to prove, both the

leadership and the president, to work in synchrony in some of the critical issues. to do what needs to be done. new congress is coming finding the issues. or infrastructure. things that matter. then have to develop a budget to pay their weight for tax reform. >> congressman frost, good as could i ask you for two big issues. >> can i mention, i have the issue. ook about

to most difficult issues where broadly find bipartisan corporation. lot of special interest in both size and both parties, to try and see if you can operate. a migration reform is horribly complex issue. i usually say that security reform seemed like a walk in the park. those are going to be the test if you can have true bipartisanship. the last immigration reform passed was not perfect, it took a long time to get done.

prison -- f the is very important. hopefully he conceded that he can build whatever legacy he is to leave. that is yet to be determined successful this will be. one of these additional house of a in the yes many atives, different districts. the institutional forces that push people to extremes in their own parties. because they are worried about primary challengers. republicans are worried about from the far right. very few people actually losing primaries but the change their attitude because they are afraid. that makes it more difficult to meet in the center.

the jury is out, we are all hopeful and we will like to see bipartisanship and cooperation. but we can tell you if it is really going to happen. i think mitch mcconnell is a very able leader. i think he will want to try to get some things done. question is, for him, how does he deal with the most extreme of his own party, can he get them to join in this dialogue, and do something that is constructive. the tea party had a veto in the last congress. are all hopeful. chosen ard nixon was president in 1968, they said

should get a clean shave and start new. what we are is now. that has republican majority, and that a lot of tea party aligned republicans are are a lot of ere members chosen from north-eastern states and be to the most c center, to those members push in the opposite direction? i think there do. look at new york, and a of other like maine. have the tea party, but you also have pragmatist. people who want to govern and want to move forward.

you can marginalise extremist, and not let them get in mcconnell you put the summer who can together legislations. you don't have to have 280 votes, you just need to have majority of the republican. together hundred 20 a number of with democrats. you can get some of these things done. we will see. president has to douse, if get a esent b she will lot done. just a few members

to speak about him, they embarrassed him a little bit. going to be t is marginalised, if speakers circle the wagon. they made it clear, they have been getting money. the other lesson, the republicans are going to establish a very good job that normal people were nominated. you don't nominate nuts, have nothing to eat. obama and ut barack his record. helps both the speaker and mcconnell.

know mitch mcconnell well, he said that he would be more open to process more debate than harry reid. allow an open process and will he go back to the old nominee rules= >> i know he is deadly serious to the oing back regulation. mitch if you do not do, what promise to do will replace you as leader. that is so important. one thing that has been

half of the senate is on the first term. have of the senate has never seen legislation occurred in their lives. with continuous relations -- resolutions and bills. they have never attended a conference of any kind between the senate and the house. they don't know how that is supposed to be done. the normal pattern was before, was put on the floor, you spent your time managing the bill, or managers, because and a reporter magic democratic manager. then you said would you please not offer for the following reasons, or you will say we will accept that.

just en the two managers, to move ahead you end up with or six important amendments which you vote on the bill to take congress. half of the senate has never seen that. mitch mcconnell is determined to return to that kind of work. when you go back to that kind of world and you start people who come in, people who think that you go to is give a all you do speech. you as a senator hhave no input whatsoever in any legislation. the leader takes care of all of

that. lyndon johnson never had the that f legislators power harry reid has. determined to change that. our biggest to happen, all kinds of good things will begin to happen. if you had two managers on the floor, republicans and democrats, you have to get together. i have done it. you cannot been mad against you can't about when you're trying to move a bill across the floor. all kind of wonderful things begin to happen, and that is mitch mcconnell's number one goal. has an enormous advantage, that is not available to most senators.

he knows he's not going to be of the united states some day. some of to get rid of the difficulties. eliminate this quaestor. go back when people make decisions when they considered what they had to be done. locked in a eing straitjacket. regard to any needs, or is the e thinking about topline number. he can regular order. go back to legislating

intelligently. i think it is the best thing republicans could possibly do preparation for 2016. because the question will be is able to govern, right now the question is neither one. republicans by controlling down the es, tamping chuckle heads, ccan establish themselves like the party to win. -- i leave you with a piece of history.

1964. the republican party was doomed. a question of how likely a new party will be formed to replace it, because tremendous , the in ublicans have received the 64 lockdown. four years later the one the presidency, because all of the difficulties that were there. and the inability of the democrats to face the biggest challenge, the vietnam war. if the republicans are going to come back they have to show they can govern. that means they have to show in the senate they can legislate.

i am old enough to remember go n when approbation is to one by one, most of them would be considered separately. time since a long that happened. keeping a republican control of congress will go back to that? >> i hope will go back to that. made the re when we blue dog coalition. what we so as democrats was a fairly change. was very young there. democrats around the south were kicked out of their positions.

withput a coalition together to across the ted we were not w that there to carry party labels for agenda. the present there was bill clinton. 10 or 15 republicans culled 10 or 15 with democrats. we had a committee assignments and that kind of things. i ran some interesting conversations that i try to dodge. we did come together. it to the e a series of appropriater.

there propriators over were serious about returning to the day when those bills could be passed and the job could be accomplished. next week we will see, the dust will settle. harry reid's t attitude is after this very bad night. pick up they begin to the pieces. the use i want to involve audience in this, will see if message two years the last night is translated to this is a time to fight the president, to repeal obamacare. we have serious legislation issues that need to be addressed. have a debt limit.

to bring ourselves members across e the aisle, together of the issues and topics to show what kind of give and take is going on. i help with see more of that. >> could i make a brief observation. have had a succession of they decided they needed to write bills. to have leadership bills. maybe it is possible in the very hard to do,

with leaders of the house and to go regular order. i hope you're right but it is very hard. because you have both republicans and democrats speakers. the senate has been wiped out in the house. >> mr frost, you are in the house in the 90's when bill clinton was in office. he made some propositions with republicans. will bill clinton react to last night's results? >> i do not want to give a long answer. with the do

president's attitude. if you are to do things on a it will be manner, good. if it is hide in the white take a strong n't rolethere will be the same. i hope obama takes some real leadership. is debt at he issues dealing, the question if this is moving in a clear way, or it to have conditions attached to it by republicans? >> that is not going to be where they spend their time. think they want to

repeat the embargo 2011. crisis think of all the everyone was rred, was manufactured. i'm sure mcconnell will want to into the debt question. as a result the economy and the private sector have lost certainty. i'm sure they will find a way to pave forward. the agenda, is going to mcconnell senator

and the president to see the they should take action. that is different today than it was in previous times. year after the election, it really counts on legislating and governing. is a perpetual campaign. that is what they have to avoid. the more conversation between and the ident and rtisan leadership, regularising those meetings. those coming occasions are to be essential. is that they both need to work for the interests of this country. of this, you have to nail and a legislative process other critical questions.

i'm sure senator mcconnell will want to. debt so they canbegin to move. test for senator mcconnell, to tell ted cruz he is the leader. he is in charge, and tetras ted cruz the tale waggles the dog. >> there is no politician in washington like mitch mcconnell.

ted cruz represents an unsettling factor between the republicans. this just comes from conversations. mitch is very much under the radar and very methodical, he has to seal him of. refer to expel him. to be a party bills going about erful, with head that in utah, when mike lee said you're not going to be able to do anything. and they said we are going to take over. by the time they go through as

three of them them left. all these other people from the party did not join, mcconnell, i do know some who ifics of people saying, i know privately, now they are with mcconnell. and ted cruz is good to look around and there is not going to be that many people with. mccolgan deal with this. away from e minutes the audience, if you want ask a stand up and lineup. tweet wanted to questions to us.

one question i had, healthcare it will be repealed, do parties will two actually agree on the affordable care act? >> i think so. people like paul ryan recognised that the polish and up repeal obamacare in january. is t people feel like there some decent parts for the affordable care act, and some horrible ones. it was rammed down the republican party's throat. i think the smart people in the report can party get that has to be an alternative. repair e to see, this and not replace.

the dumbest thing that bought ever did, i was off for this. bubble on a n the bill, and somebody said we can take care of somebody is important to you. it is important. i think they have done the endous damage to ability of leaders to get aligned. because the teaching at -- is getting n underway to.

>> infrastructure. been ose issues have we see ed, transportation committee at the house. that bill, the surface transportation act, has been a hard bill to crack without funding. that is the perfect example of a serious piece of legislation which is over due. we have known, that you

needed more money. ways, the raise taxes. the president and the senate to take the mantle. republicans are known for be lding america. we should ashamed of ourselves. what the panel thought, what harry reid is practising to be as minority leader. >> i served with harry when he was in a house. able and skilled politician, i do not know how is going to approach things.

i think he understands that is the interest of everybody , that there will be progress on some important issues. democrats in y to ficult races that trying protect those senators. he is not in control. i'm hopeful that harry will find a way. harry and mcconnell, are both very capable people. it is just a question if they can sit down and work this out. are both skilled politicians. trade and s bipartisan cooperation?

>> organise labour and trade will have publicans votes to pass legislation. going answer how that is to play out. be elieve that it will easier now, to move trade regulation. >> it depends on a great deal on the leadership of the president. president has been portrayed kindly, and the divisions in the congress are to not be kindly. come dent obama needs to out and says "okay, this is

what we have to do". in the trade issue democrats should be behind him. >> properly the best you could do is get a significant minority of democrat. to you had enough democrats join with president and republicans you would have a real chance. it happened with nafta and the trade with china. we will see. you think the in ction what will get done the lame-duck session? we have both served on those sessions and they are

frustrating and not productive. can reach an agreement. rather than planning this to the next congress. >> 2010 was a very productive session. basically it will be, we have the path to continue the resolution. of the tober is the end fiscal year. i would say this is a very productive line. even ey are anxious to give a shot. other national defence act which has been passed every year as far back as everybody can remember.

you have some big issues which can be addressed. more finance for ebola. are they going to do a quick and quick out? begin to get l addressed. i was a republican serving in the senate will not much done in lame-duck. >> mcconnell has said he wants a clean slate. will like to get everything put together and passed the deal licans don't have to with a hangover of the other congress. interesting that two senators have sent him a formal saying they will object. the two names who

are. objects that is it. >> what is the actual incentives for this congress to work together and cooperate, you had it seems that the bstruction congress in last session, republicans obstructing the legislation process in the senate. i'm not comfortable with party blaming. the with ntives are the majority? shut epublicans almost down the government. >> the control of the senate was in democratic hands.

the present the biltong coming floor was democratic leaders. he was in alaska furious because he could not get any amendments or legislation. back to my opening statement, to open that up. is not the obstruction of republicans that has closed the senate. it was harry reid, which i understand he made a mistake. back to an earlier question. think harry and i will recognise that his strategy did not work and paid a high price for it. am going to change.

he is also someone who to be tands his noggin the president. a great there is opportunity here. >> the incentive is pretty simple. democrats got tossed out of the senate. to act senate is enabled the republicans senators will suffer in 2016. is a part incentive by the republicans. >> both sides have interest in getting something done. the democrats and the way it handled the united states. denial of also a

offering amendment. the amendment towards consensus, if you cannot offer that you cannot build consensus. and you can compromise on any legislation. is the opening day, there will be critical. we have come up with a number of recommendations in that to is officially change a lot of this. senator mcconnell's offer is going to be crucial. many of the issues the american people care about.

window is very limited, in which they can function successfully. they need to secure his own legacy. interest on mutual basis. not to be an obstruction. but don't think republicans, if congress cannot function there is going to be a lot of people in trouble in 2016. so really it is in interest of both parts to get some agreement, especially for republicans. >> thank you i think we have the time out.

>> john baiter will be speaking life in 20 s minutes. as he talks about the agenda here and c-span. more post ntime election conversation. >> we are here from the washington post. go with you gail. should congress stop trying to fix itself? where we pull ory together lonng time congress a tchers, i interviewed the end of hem. at they suggested to reform

they had unintended consequences, like transparency laws. is even less visibility too many things. campaign finance reform, getting money out of politics. read about end and endlessly. seems the things that that have happened. it doesn't work properly unless leaders have a leveraged over the legislation. every reform idea of the last 20 or 15 years. the headline is a bit of a joke.

lower than tvs. a wer than any situation is reputation of the government. about the election return, what is the message to washington? is the message to bainer? >> i think he started at the end of last year to get people to vote for something. things like repealing obamacare. also think they wanted both sides to work together. would balkans -- republicans working together.

they need to break through, over the last congress. >> the message to the new majority leader, mitch mcconnell. >> try to get things done, get that body moving again. one of the interesting things, particularly on issues, we talked a lot about, talking a lot about keystones as one of the things that republicans are going to try to get done now that they have both houses of congress. a lot of the democrats lost represented this as well. it's not necessarily a slam-dunk just because you have two sides of congress that agree with each other. >> let me ask you about immigration. here is what the president said yesterday on the issue of immigration and whether or not he will have an executive order if congress fails to act on the issue. >> i have no doubt that there will be some republicans who e angered or frustrated by

any executive action that i may take. those are folks i just have to say who are also deeply opposed to immigration reform in any form and blocked the house from being able to pass a bipartisan bill. i have said before that i actually believe that john boehner is sincere about wanting to get immigration reform passed, which is why for a year i held off taking any beyond what we had already done for the so-called dream kids. i did everything i could to give him space and room to get something done. what i also said at the time was if, in fact, congress, if this congress could not get

something done, that i would take further executive actions in order to make the system work better understanding that any bill that they pass will supplant the executive actions that i take. >> so the two take washington aways if you can read between the lines is that he will have an executive order on immigration and he also indicated that he will probably veto the keystone excel pipeline. he didn't say that. if you read between the lines, that's where his mind might be going. >> i think that's absolutely right. there are suddenly two new numbers that we haven't used in washington very much. one is 290, the other is 67. that's the threshold for overcoming a presidential veto. it is the new reality now. you can talk about a lot of things, but if you cannot get the president to sign your bill, it's going nowhere. the other thing that i think is very interesting about this is the amount of leverage that both leaders have within their

own party. the president talks about it as if it's a character issue, boehner couldn't somehow deliver his caucus. it's actually mass. when nancy pelosi passed health care reform, she had 40 votes on her side of the aisle that she could say fine, we don't need you. vote the way you think you have to. boehner hasn't had that. it's not clear what the number now is, how many tea party folks he can just say, fine, vote however you want and get something through. those are the two numbers. >> speaker boehner and senator mitch mcconnell with an op-ed in the "wall street journal" getting attention. now we can get congress saying before the tax code, we need to reform the tax code and redefine full-time as working 40 hours a week. we need to move on the keystone pipeline. there are plenty of tasks ahead. they conclude by saying this, the skeptics say nothing will be accomplished in the next two

years. as elected center advance of the people we will make it our job that the skeptics are wrong. >> color me a skeptic. there are internal issues and the president ready with a veto pen. he has vetoed two bills so far in his presidency. most of that was because of errors in the bill. i think you're going to see that uptick significantly. as far as tax reform, you have corporate taxs as something they're going to push. you have the medical device tax that they want to repeal. even those two things, it's going to be a difficult task. >> and the democratic leader, nancy pelosi, again saying she is going to run. do you think that they'll be any move, have any change in the democrat leadership either in the house or the senate? >> i only think there will be and it never happens, there is no reason i could possibly be right in this case. this is a leader who just raised $100 million. i think if you go over her entire career going back to

when she was cartooned as just a hostess who gave parties, she was actually raising a ton of money. and knowing the donors on the democratic side better than probably any leader ever, i don't think she is going unless she wants to, it seems pretty clear she doesn't want to. >> she said in this letter, our members and candidates won hard fought campaigns and supported by connected to their constituents and strengthened by the tenacious leadership of steve israel. unfortunately, we lost some valued members of the house, but we must continue to fight the middle income families who are the backbone of our democracy. there is important work to do to jump-start the middle class which we hope we can do with bipartisanship and fairness. jackie. >> i would agree with gail that nancy pelosi will be there as long as she wants to be or and the math didn't look good for democrats in the house at present, or until they take over the house again, then i

think she is going to get some of the younger members of the caucus challenging her. until then, there is no reason. >> look at this math because you can see the dark areas are republicans in the house of representatives and the lighter areas, the democratic seats in the house and it's certainly on each coast and sprinkled in the middle in the upper midwest, but for the most part, geographically, this is a republican country when you look at this map in the "washington post." >> a map that's even more interesting to my sense is looking what happened at the state legislature level. you now 25 states with a republican governor and an entire republican legs layer to you and 1/3 of the states have entirely republican house and congress -- and senate. that's extraordinary numbers especially when you're seeing what they're doing at the state

level, medicare, access to guns and even women's reproductive rights. if you ask yourself what most impacts what my daily life is like, the states are having a great deal to say about that. a lot of the interesting fights are at that level. many people expected that sam brown beck would be gone. his plan was just too radical. there.till governor walker is still there. that is every bit as interesting as to what is happening in washington. >> that's a consequences of 2010. that's when the republican legislatures really started rising and democrats haven't been able to break that since that happened. people talk about how the tea party is diluting the power, i think is one of the, of the things that that particular, i guess revolution has helped. >> we heard from senator pat roberts on his victory speech

incoming ill be the chair of the senate agriculture committee. what chains can we expect among these keselowski in the senate when the g.o.p. takes over? >> in terms of? >> the chairman. >> the chairman, i think, hmm, that is an excellent question. i think one of the things that is going to change as far as the races that are still out, one of the biggest pushes was that i am the chair of the energy committee. that's why you should send me back. she is no longer the chair of the energy committee and doesn't have nearly the influence that she did when emocrats were in the majority. i think that hurt her as we go into this december runoff. >> also reported this morning that a lot of the traditional groups that have supported democrats may not be there for her because of her support of the keystone pipeline and issues dealing with women's reproductive rights. >> exactly. the chairman, the employment

institute, he wants to stay on at financial services and he was the one that people thought might challenge boehner. it looks now as if that's not going to happen. in fact, that's one of the interesting stories how this speaker has moved very quickly to consolidate his position. i think you're going to see a very different situation in the new house. the tea party, you ask tea party people, well, who do you claim credit for bringing into the new congress? it's not like 2010. within tea party ranks, i think one of the most interesting spurts is going to be looking at where senator paul and cruz goes. paul introduces a whole new set of issues with tremendous bipartisan potential such as mandatory sentencing or, what is his other one, n.s.a. you can get support on the left other issues like spying and i

think there will be a lot of creativity in republican ranks on that front. >> the other thing interesting about rand paul in particular, he has a great relationship with mitch mcconnell, in part because they're from the same state. he endorsed him, early against his republican opponent. i think that relationship is going to be extremely interesting to watch. i think it's good for mcconnell to have someone like rand paul on his side if there is a filibuster in the air, a little bit more control over that. look ie and gail, as we at the election returns, look ahead at what it means for congress this year and next year. good morning, welcome to the conversation. caller: hi, how are you? guest: fine, thank you. caller: what i wanted to ask is now that the republicans are taking over everything, does that mean they're going to go

along with ryan's budget and cut medicare and give vouchers out? e they also going to private advertise social security which they have threatened to do over and over and over again. caller: e- host: let's take the social security issue first. that is not part of the debate, will it? guest: social security is something everyone talks about and finds a good reason to delay. over the next two years, rule of thumb, everything gets absorbed into 2016. people are already talking about this being the electricity of our lifetime because so many critical issues will have to be decided. ever since i have covered congress since 2000, there have been people saying if we don't deal with social security now, it will be too late, it's upon us. it really is upon us in 2016. nything big is going to be kicked over into that period simply because you cannot overcome a presidential veto and no one wants to go into

that election with tough votes. the social security vote is going to be very difficult. if you don't do it in a bipartisan way, it's not going to get done. host: good morning to you. caller: thank you for taking my call. there is one part of the election that is very important to understand. confirmation at of federal judges, the district federal judges, supreme court justice also. obama, they had a rule thing they couldn't get anything passed without a simple majority, 51. now that the republicans have control, probably more moderate judges will come up, too. as far as anything else goes, what about medicaid and medicare, are they going to do something about that because it's probably money anyways. thank you for taking my call.

host: appreciate it. guest: the last time that harry reid is able to try to get through some of the president's people, it's on the top of the ajeppeda for the democratic senate. host: next to mark joining us from the line for democrats. good morning. mark, are you with us? try one more time for mark in west valley? how about tim in maine joining us on the republican line. go ahead, tim. caller: i would like to make a comment about an executive order. i would like to see the president make. hello? host: we can hear you, go ahead, tim. caller: for many years, there has been a lot of corporations in this country that's been hiring illegal workers for the sole purpose of evading taxes, the social security medicare taxes. i would like to see the president do an executive order

to start going after some of these c.e.o.'s specifically in the meat packing industry. they have been doing it for 40 years now and been getting away with it. host: ok, thanks for the call. you're shaking your head. guest: he is right. that is one of the issues that is most frustrating. it's also one that potentially could unite some democrats and some republicans. the leadership doesn't want to go after corporations period, whether they're republican or democratic leaders. that's been a real slow point. i think that the caller is absolutely right. is he still there, by the way? host: he is not, no. he brought up the issue of executive orders and the president talked about this yesterday. he framed the issue of immigration, if congress acts on immigration, that would supersede anything that i sign into law as an executive order. he is saying congress act, but if you don't, i'm going to act. >> and he added another element to it. he said, once you act, if you

t in a way that i think is acceptable, i will rescind my order. it's a brand-new theory of checks and balances. the first time i heard it was congressman beserra saying we have given congress time to act and they haven't acted, so now we're acting. where in the federalist papers that one branch says time out, we're acting on our own. >> republicans taking senate doesn't solve the immigration problem. the senate passed an immigration bill. the house is more republican than before and that's where the hold-up has been. i don't see how republicans taking the senate all of a sudden means immigration reform is clear to go. >> let me go back to that editorial this morning with speaker boehner and senator mcconnell. they again talked about obama care. here is what senator mcconnell said yesterday in louisville. >> there is no secret that everyone of my members thinks

that obama care was a huge legislative mistake. it has fouled up the health insurance market, put states in a deep hole in terms of medicaid expansion and our ability to finance it years from now. if i had the ability, carl, obviously, i would get rid of it. obviously it's also true, he is still there. so we'll be discussing how to go forward on this issue when we get back. i will say this for sure, there are pieces of it that are deeply, deeply unpopular with the american people. the medical device tax which is exported an enormous number of jobs, the loss of the 40-hour workweek, big, big mistake, that ought to be restored. the individual mandate, people hate it. so i think we will be discussing that issue in a variety of different ways. host: to finish this morning in

the "washington post" and syndicated across the country, george will talks about what he calls a fresh start congress and he makes reference to what senator mcconnell referred to the medical device tax, a $29 billion blow to an industry that has about 400,000 jobs. the president yesterday saying if you come with good ideas at the table, i'll look at them, t i'm not going to undermine the key components of the affordable care act. that's one key component because it funds the affordable care act. where does it put them? >> it's going to get readoed. mcconnell's rhetoric changed so he is a little bit softer. mcconnell on obama care is conservatives in his caucus. they're going to keep pushing this. they're going to keep obama care-related measures and attaching them to all sorts of bills. he has to find a way to manage that. >> does it help to have senator ted cruz as a foil for senator mcconnell? >> it can help and hurt. it's a double-edged sword in a

lot of ways. republicans get blamed again for derailing any progress in the senate if they keep on talking about obama care for the next few years. the >> if you're in the cabinet room tomorrow morning, if that's where the meeting is going to take place between the president and the congressional leaders, democrats and republicans, the dynamics most mostly being the president and senator mcconnell? >> their relationship is not as bad as people think. mcconnell is a professional through and through. nobody knows procedure better and probably nobody knows his caucus better than he does. he don't underestimate him. you heard in the president's speech yesterday a lot of respect for him because he felt he is someone who when he says he can deliver his caucus, he can. i think that's going to be a basis for a working relationship of sorts. i think the president's real problem is actually with

democrats who bitterly resent the impact that he had on their races just the occasional remarks he makes about, he said at one point it's good that there is a republican house and a republican senate because now we can negotiate and i'm thinking what does that sound like to a house democrat who in effect gave him everything he wanted at the beginning and since then have really seen their ranks continue to decrease. >> well, let me pick up from that point, some interesting insight from your colleagues, an extensive piece available online at "washington post".com, the battle for the senate, how the g.o.p. did it. there is a name in it that most viewers may not be familiar with, a key player because of his role as chief of staff to harry reid. the president's approval rating is barely at 40%. what more is there to say? he wasn't going to play well in

north carolina or iowa or new hampshire, i'm sorry, it doesn't mean that the message was bad, but sometimes the messenger isn't good. this is coming from a democrat who is the chief of staff to the senate democratic leader. >> he is not off the reservation. he is a very close confidant to senator reid. it's not like he ran out and decided he was going to talk to some reporters. this obviously was something that was sanctioned. that piece throughout shows the frustration senate democrats have with the president throughout the election, particularly when it came to money. the president can raise tons of money, they wanted him to raise money for the senate majority p.a.c. his visors kept coming up with all of these legal reasons why he couldn't. i feel like they felt that obama used his network just for his re-election and kind of left them out to dry. there were comments that the president made where he said my policies are on the ballot in

he have single one. i was looking at all of the debates one night with republican candidates and democratic -- >> i missed you all. [laughter] >> that's what the president said yesterday. >> he did? >> same thing. >> hope you didn't believe it. >> never do. [laughter] >> i'm going to start by congratulating my friend, senator mitch mcconnell. as you know, mitch and i have worked very closely together over the last eight years and i don't think i could ask for a better partner or do i think the senate could have a better majority leader than mitch mcconnell. also, i express my gratitude to the people of ohio's eighth congressional district. my mission is the same today as it was in 1990 when i was first elected to build a smaller, ess costly, more accountable

government here in washington, d.c. and right now i believe that means continuing to listen, to make the american people's priorities our priorities and confront the big challenges that face middle class families starting with the economy. you have heard me talk many times about the many jobs bills that the outgoing senate majority has ignored. ose bills will offer the congress, i think, a new start. we can act on the keystone pipeline, restore the 40-hour workweek that was gutted by ama care and pass the harm our heroes act that will encourage our businesses to hire more of our veterans. again, this is just a start. i'll be going around the country outlining my own personal vision for how we can reset america's economic foundation. the energy boom that is going on in america is real.

i think it provides us with a very big opportunity, but to maximize that opportunity, i believe we have to do five things. that is fix our broken tax code, address the debt that is hurting our economy and imprisoning the future of our our nd grandkids, reform legal system, reshape our regulatory policy to make bureaucrats more accountable and give parents more choices in a system that isn't educating enough of america's children. now, finding common ground is going to be hard work, but it will be even harder if the president isn't willing to work with us. yesterday we heard him say that he may double down on his go it alone approach. i told the president before, he needs to put politics aside and rebuild trust and rebuilding trust not only with the american people, but with the american people's

representatives here in the united states congress. this is the best way to deliver solutions, to get the economy going again and to keep the american dream alive and well. this will be the focus of our new majority. i'm eager to get to work. >> mr. speaker, as the president moves forward on immigration and acts alone on immigration, is that going to poison the well for any type of cooperation between this new republican majority and the white house? >> no, starting two years yesterday that our immigration program is broken and needs to be fixed. i made it clear to the president if he acts unilaterally on his own outside of his authority, he will poison the we will and there will be -- well and there will be no chance for immigration reform moving in this congress. it's as simple as that. >> mr. speaker, you mentioned ama care and the 40-hour

workweek, the second brave talked about obama care. w do you walk this balance without this being the predomen nant issue, or is it when freshman coming in who haven't voted for obama care or tweaking it to go for a full repeal? >> obama care is hurting our economy. it's hurting middle class families and it's hurting the ability for employers to create more jobs. and so the house, i'm sure at some point next year will move to repeal obama care because it should be repealed. it should be replaced with common sense reforms. respect the doctor-patient relationship. now whether that can pass the senate, i don't know. i know in the house it will pass. we will pass that. that doesn't mean that we shouldn't do other things. there are bipartisan bills that have passed the house, sitting in the senate that would in

fact make changes to obama care. there is a bipartisan majority in the house and senate for repealing the medical device tax. i think there is a by part unanimous majority in the house and senate for getting rid of the ipad, the independent payment advisory board, the ragsing board in obama care. how about the individual mandate, there are democrats and republicans who believe this is unfair. just because we may not be able to get everything we want doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to get what we can. >> you mentioned different issues there, votes in this congress goes back into obama care and the numbers gets into the 60 and 70's in terms of roll call against obama? >> there are bipartisan majority in the house and senate to take some of these issues out of obama care. we need to put them on the president's desk and let him choose. >> mr. speaker, you heard the president say that he basically

gave you a year waiting for you to be able to deliver on immigration reform and that in this post-election period he is ready to act, he would pull back the executive orders if you could have legislation that works. could that be a catalyst for you to actually get something done? >> no, i believe that the president continues to act on his own, he is going to poison the well. when you play with matches, you take the risk of burning yourself. he is going to burn yourself if he continues to go down this path. the american people made it clear election day, they want to get things done and they don't want the president acting on a unilateral basis. >> mr. speaker, how do you expect the president to trust that you really want to work together when out of the gate, you say that you want to repeal his signature law that you know has no chance of getting a veto proof majority. how do you expect him to trust you? >> my job is to listen to the american people. the american people have made

it clear they're not for obama care. ask all of those democrats who lost their elections on tuesday night. a lot of them voted for obama care. my job is not to get along with the president just to get along with him, although we actually have a nice relationship. the fact is my job is listen to my members and listen to the american people and make their priorities our priorities. >> mr. speaker, the "wall street journal" is out with a report saying that president obama has sent a secret letter to iran's supreme leader on fighting isis, your reaction, sir? >> i don't trust the i iranians. i don't think we need to bring them into this. i would hope that the negotiations that are underway are serious negotiations. i have my doubts. >> having heard your reilt rated threat, the president said suddenly, fine, i will take executive action on immigration. could you guarantee him that he

will hold votes on legislation next year? >> i have made my position very clear. it is time for the congress of the united states to deal with a very difficult issue in our society. if the immigration issue because a political football over the last 10 years or more, it's just hard to deal with it. >> can your party presidential nominee be forced to run if you -- politics. not about this is trying to do the right thing for the country. mr. speaker, isn't the idea of repealing obama care third or fourth line in your op-ed today, isn't it in a sense poisoning the well from your angle? >> no. our job is to make the american people's priorities our priorities. they don't like obama care. i don't like it. it's hurting our economy. the president said i listened to what happened tuesday night.

really? >> the economy, though, how do you -- >> well you spend as many nights on the road as i have over the last two years, you would hear from employers of every stripe, large, small, medium, every industry and you listen to the employers talking about the concerns they have of what it means for their workforce and their employees and you see them hesitate in terms of hiring more people, it's pretty clear to me. >> mr. speaker, you have a new crop of conservatives coming into the house who have suggested among other things that women submit to the authority of their husbands, that hillary clinton is the ti-christ and that the families of sandy hook should get over it. the caucus is getting bigger -- >> no, no, no. deal with them

differently than you did in the last congress? >> i think the premise of your question i would take exception to. yes, we have some new members who have made some statements, i'll give you that. but when you look at the vast majority of the new members that are coming in here, they're really solid members. whether it's the youngest woman to ever serve in the congress to another african-american republican from texas, we have done a very good job of recruiting good candidates and we're going to have a very good crop of good members. >> for example, you tried to act in the last congress and your conservative members yanked you back. how can you work with the president on an issue like this? >> no, i would argue with the premise of the question. what held us back last year was a flood of kids coming to the border because of the actions that the president had already taken. let me tell you what the american people from the right to the left started to look at this issue in a very different

way. that's why i made it clear, the president, if he continues to go down this path of taking action on his own is inviting big trouble. >> the last six months, what about the 18 months before that? >> i could regale you with all of my challenges of trying to get members on both sides of the aisle to deal with this. hey were numerous. hope springs eternal. >> mr. speaker, harry reid, the republican party has done what it said out to accomplish by firing harry reid. he is no longer an obstacle of getting the agenda of the republicans through this congress? >> you might want to ask mitch mcconnell about that question. still u see him as

being someone who has power to thwart. >> of course, you know how the senate works, it requires 60 votes to do almost anything in the senate. clearly he is going to have some power. but if you look at the, let's take the 46 jobs bills that are sitting in the united states senate that have been held up by the democrat majority in the senate, almost all of those passed the house on a bipartisan basis. i believe that almost all of them enjoy bipartisan support in the united states senate. if you're doing, as you have heard me say this before, i tell my colleagues all the time, if you're doing the right things for the right reasons, you don't have to worry about anything. the right things will happen. next. >> will you compromise on the 0-hour workweek -- >> speaker boehner and other congressional leaders will meet with the president tomorrow at the white house and both the the and senate return,

government is operating on temporary spending through december. the senate let members know when they return they'll be voting on jude jail nominations. leader ties will hold ip elections in january. follow us on espn and c-span 2. >> this weekend on the c-span networks, more reaction to the midterm elections. on saturday night at 8:00, a debate on the future of the internet and sunday evening at 8:00 on q & a, tavis smiley on his latest book, "death of a king." and am hurst college professor n german-occupied paris. jeff chang on the idea of racial progress in america.

edward o'wilson, friday at 8:00, on american history tv on c-span 3, med honor recipients reflect on their service in world war ii, vietnam and afghanistan. and saturday, the social prejudice immigrants faced during the 1800's. sunday night at 8:00, the 25th anniversary of the fall of the berlin wall. find their television schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think of the program you're watching. call us, email us or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> some polls before tuesday's election are now being criticized for being wrong. next democratic and republican pollsters talk about the what the results mean for the 2016 presidential election and the future of both parties on how pollsters get the information. his is about 45 minutes.

[applause] >> fantastic, all right, we're going to get started with our first panel about last night and key election results and the outcomes. i want to welcome to the stage ron foreigny, a senior report for national journal and ron ll be joined on stage with north star opinion research, salinda lake, ron, i'll let you go ahead and get started. >> i was doing an interview back there with salinda. so thank you all for coming. this is going to be a real good conversation. very good sources and political mentors of mine over the years kind of keeping me straight and hopefully they can shed some light on what happened last night. since we're dealing way couple

pollsters, i was starting with a handful of numbers that jumped out at me with exit polls and a thought experiment for our guests, i would like you to think of the thought experiment as well and maybe we can see some good questions when we get towards the end of this. when you look at the exit polls, a little of the majority of the electorate who voted last night disapprove of president obama, no surprise. 80% disapprove of congress as an institution. 60% disapprove of their leadership in congress and at the white house. only 44% of the people who voted have a positive opinion of the democratic party. less than that, 40% have a positive opinion of the republican party. 2/3 of the country thinks the nation is on the wrong track. only 22% of americans right now think the next generation is going to be better than the current one. only 22% of the public still think there is such thing as an american dream. so here is a thought

experiment. if last night, wave a magic wand, if people who were voting last night had the same buffet of choices in politics that they have in the theater, where they're going to shop, how they're going to shop, where they're going to eat, how they're going to eat, we're in the era of choice now, if people have that kind of buffet of choice in politics last night, how many republicans and democrats would have been thrown out of office? salinda, why don't you answer that question, how much of a republican victory yesterday was a choice between two evils? >> there is no question that people are guess gusted with washington and discouraged with the state of the nation, but let's not mistake who won and who lost yesterday. yesterday was a whopping rejection of this president and this president's agenda, the people who lost yesterday were democrats. republicans picked up or will pick up nine senate seats and

are within an eyelash of picking up a 10th in virginia. we defeated five or will defeat after louisiana runoff five senate incumbents. we are going to pick up at least 11 seats and maybe get the largest majority in the house since world war ii. we held the governorship in florida and picked up three governorships in deep blue states, maryland, massachusetts, and illinois. it's pretty clear which party lost yesterday and which party won. >> the second part is not clear. all is clear is that your party you proved yesterday we weren't quite as bad as the other guys. going forward, how does the republican party turn yesterday's democratic defeat into a true governing that improves the republican brand going forward? >> by demonstrating we can govern. the smartest politicians i have worked with all believe that people vote for things as well

against things. they vote for positive agendas as well as against agendas they don't like. that's why the r.n.c. chairman put together october 1 a list of positive principals that republican candidates can stand behind. it covers the array of various policy areas. that's the first place i think a republican congress can go. that's a positive principals and show that they can govern. >> i would suggest and would be disagreeing, we can come back to it later, we didn't see many of those principals presented by the rebs in the election. it would be great going forward, but it was mainly an anti-obama election. first of all, do you agree that last night was a shell lacking or a thumping to use the last two president's words or would you have a better adjectives for how badly the democrats got beat? >> i think that obviously the democrats got badly beat last night. there are three things i would say.

one, i think the table was set very poorly for the democrats from the git-go, structural alley, an offyear election, the array of senate sis that were up and the turnout of voters were lower and we weren't as successful localizing our base to counter those trends. >> what happens with the coalition, has it declined? >> no, it turns out every four years, not every two. >> that's a big problem. >> it's a big problem. >> why is it a problem? >> it's a problem that gets better every year, though, the republicans are living on borrowed time on their coalition. you asked and this is the question i think democrats have o answer, why did we have such problems despite such great organization in turning out the base and why did we do so poorly, particularly among independent women. i think the answer to that is the economy. we did not have and we did not end on an economic message, we

have never won elections when we haven't been ahead on the economy and on the election eve we were even on the economy, slightly behind on jobs. the we split economic voters. the voters that you listed, the ones that you think the economy is not good, their kids won't have a better future, we lost voters. >> whose fact is that the democratic party didn't have an economic message, does it start at the top? >> it starts at the top. it's hard for an individual senate candidate to articulate an overall economic message. that said -- >> let's not move off that too quickly. why did the president fumble that? it's his economy. why didn't he do a better job of presenting a plan? >> he had a lot of crisis in the fall. >> presidents have to deal with crisis and run a campaign as an explanation. >> i would agree. i hope you call the president and talk to him about that. >> what would you tell the president if he would answer your question today? >> articulate tomorrow an economic vision for the country

and say just as bill clinton did, we have done this, but it's not good enough. we're going to work with republicans to get these things done. >> on that message to the president, last night his aides were pretty defiant. quoted as saying he does not feel repudiated. how does that bode for us going forward if the president thinks hat last night was a repudiation of his record so far? >> one of the lessons from this election is that arrogance will bite you. this president is the most arrogant politician of my entire lifetime. he set his own people up. he really did. he set his own people up. the only way the case hagans and the mark pryors and all of the other democrats that lost yesterday were going to survive was to separate themselves from the president. the president's response was that's fine, they'll vote with me anyway.

or i'm not on the ballot, my policies are. the president made the republican argument for us. we barely needed to make it. the response yesterday was, well, if these democrats hadn't run away from the president, many of them would have done better. what alternative universe are these people living in? it's breathtakingly arrogant and this president helped make our case for us and helped sink all of these democratic senators. >> we're on the topic of arrogance, a well-respected republican consultant said the hard right is not controlled by the republican agenda anymore. the inmates are no longer running the asylum. do you think that's true? is the hard right no longer running the republican party and on what would you base that? >> i think part of the key for the republican victories yesterday is that we had candidates that managed to unite the republican coalition and that's another takeaway from yesterday.

candidate quality really, eally matters. across the board we nominated better candidates who ran better campaigns, just three quick examples, corey gardner in colorado was a far superior candidate than we nominated last final. he ran a great campaign and run comfortably against a guy who beat the war on women to death, senator uterus -- >> let's get the name right. > sorry, mark udall. jody ernst in iowa was a great candidate who ran a great campaign. i'm so proud of ed gillespie, i'm about to bust. back on labor day, in a journal editorial report to keep an eye on ed gillespie, he was going to be an upset special and a lot of people thought i was nuts. you know how good he is, smart he is and how good a campaign

he ran and he was within an eyelash of knocking off someone that everybody virtually thought was unbeatable. we had better candidates and candidates who could unite the republican coalition. that's what it's going to take in 2016. >> you didn't really answer the arrogance question. let me try it another way. that said the number one issues that voter was looking for was the economy and breaking gridlock. i see no evidence the last few years that the president of the united states is either willing or comparable of breaking gridlock. i see no evidence that the republican party establishment is willing or able to compromise and break gridlock. >> i disagree. if you listen to mitch mcconnell's -- >> words are words. where has there been any action that suggests the republican party can do this? >> mitch mcconnell was pitch perfect last night. he basically said just what i

said to start this panel. we need to demonstrate that we can govern. mitch mcconnell believes that. my senatorial clients who want yesterday believe that. >> why should we believe that it's any different now? >> because i think that you have an attitude of people who got elected yesterday that realize they need to advance a positive agenda. whether this president is even willing to work with them or not, i have no idea. he has shown no inclination or particular ability to do so. >> you think the republicans have incentive to compromise? >> yes. >> are the democrats to compromise? >> i disagree with the president hasn't tried to work with republicans, i think he has. >> he wasn't been able to get one single compromise. either he can't or won't. >> he has reached out today and said let's get together. if you look academically at the academic studies of productivity, divided

governments, congress on one hand, president on one hand, more productive than mixed government. >> why is that you think? >> the house and senate will be able to agree on a lot and deliver it and i think neither side is interested in just veto government by veto. so i think there is, it is greatly incentivized to compromise when you have one house and one senate that never send anything up. the other thing i want to say, though, that is the most important lesson last night. i agree with you a lot but not this. the democratic agenda was rejected last night. the republicans were very successful in nationalizing the race. >> can you flesh it out a little bit? >> when voters had the ability to directly vote on the issues -- >> minimum wage in arkansas? >> minimum wage in four states,

paid sick days in two cities and a state, legalizing marijuana in several states and you can go on and on, rejecting the two-party primary. board, the democratic agenda did very well when they could vote directly on the issues. >> it doesn't matter yesterday when it came down to the voting, but is there a distinction that the democratic party maybe can learn from? >> a lot bigger issue than minimum wage or any of these other issues was obama care in these critical senate battleground states. obama care was an albatross around the necks of democrats who voted for it, not just because of one factor, it's a combination. it's the substance of the law. it is what it represented, a large government intrusion into the health care sphere, but also how it was passed. major social changes get passedby partisan majority if they are going to stick.

a majority of house republicans voted for medicare in 1965. a quarter of the senate republicans voted for medicare. medicare prescription part d that passed during george w bush's administration passed with democratic votes in both the house and the senate. obama care, we had clients who were perfectly willing to work with the president on a health care reform and the basically attitude is we have the votes, we don't need you. so they crammed it down the throats of republicans, changing the rules in the senate to get it through and created a political issue that basically has killed seven promising democratic careers and is going to be an ongoing issue because of the way they passed it. >> i will stipulate that both of you were right in your last answers for sake of argument that the democratics have an agenda that on its own can be popular and in this election, obama care was a big anvil and the president was.

2016 presidential race we have a completely different electorate. obama is going to have a step out the door. obama care will be two years older. how in the world will the republicans -- by the way, the country is fast becoming a majority minority and the republican party still is basically advertising themselves as a party of white people. >> come on, ron. come on. >> it will be interesting if you can push back on that in the next two years, but that is the brand. >> we do not advertise ourselves as the party of while people, now come on. >> it's an awfully uncomfortable place for a person of color to be right now. >> there are many of us that arguing for a long time we need to do a better job reaching out to minorities. 35% of latinos voted for republican house candidates yesterday. that's not where we need to be. we need to be up with the 44 and 50% that george bush got. >> how do you get there in the next two years?

>> it's about how we govern and who we nominate. remember, some of us are old enough to remember the so-called republican lock on the electrical college back in the 1980's where there was no way in the world that the democrats were able to elect a president again. we had a lock on the electoral college. bill clinton comes along and said i want to end welfare as we know it, i'm for the death penalty. in one election, he turns the democratic party around. the republican party is one candidate and one election away from resurrection of the presidential level. >> do you see that candidate out there now? >> well, i happen to have a few options. i mean mark rubio is a client of ours, he is more for the republican party than anyone else out there. plenty can give a new image and a face for the republican party.

>> let's not make those assumptions? >> we got a new congress, a new day. > you agree that is an important issue? >> no question about it. 75% of the electorate was white, in 2010, it was 77. that's a continuation of a pattern of every midterm election about two percentage points less, nonhispanic white. in the presidential election in 2012, it was 72% white less than in the midterms and that goes down about 2%. we're going to have an electorate in 2016, 70% white, 30% nonwhite. it doesn't take a real genius, ron, to figure out -- >> even the university. >> done better among asians, latinos, and african-americans. >> the president was repudiated. if one of the first things he does is by fiat legalizes a lot of the legal immigrants and

doesn't work it through the political system and gets bipartisan support and the legislation to be durable needs bipartisan support, what message would he be sending to the american public? is it the same as flipping the bird to the american public? >> the american public -- >> they want a lot of things, but they don't want necessarily the chief executive to do it on his or her own. they want compromise. do you think it will be fine if he does it on his own? -- i number one reason mean, the people that won last night at the governor level are veryis luss extra tiff. have to governors that deliver. the republican governs saved themselves because they have to deliver. that is a lesson for the senate. if the senate will not -- if the senate passes bad immigration reform, that's going to be as bad as not passing any immigration reform.

if the president says, you know, these people will not work with me to have decent and humane and practical immigration reform, i'm just going to get it done, then that's an entirely different message. >> are you sure, is the public going to buy that explanation? are they going to say, oh, yeah, he tried hard and he couldn't get it done and he is doing the right thing, or are they saying another politician giving lip service to compromise, couldn't get it done and we're going to punish his party again? >> one thing, if you pass immigration reform, however you do it -- >> i was talking executive order. >> executive order, real people see something different on tuesday than they had on monday. when you get something done, it affects real people's lives. >> it doesn't matter how you get it done? >> i think it matters less how you get it done than getting it done. i think the major frustration last night was, yes, they can't compromise, but they're not getting anything done. rome is burning and they're not

getting anything done. >> real quickly on that? is getting immigration reform in any way ok? >> you can't just pass something. it's obvious we have a seriously broken system that hurts our economy, that hurts everybody involved with it. when you have a seriously broken system, it's incumbent on the congress to fix the system. it is not incumbent on a president to arrogantly try to do it on his own. that's the best way i know to kill immigration reform is to come out and take an executive order to take something that he even he has said should be the province of congress and try to do it on his own. >> i want to turn to 2016, but before i do, i have two pollsters out there. i have to ask about the polls. >> oh, my goodness, yes. >> if you guys were paying attention, they were all off, they underestimated the

democrat turnout. this has to be a hell of a scary time to be a pollster with the change of communicating. can you explain why they were so hoff yesterday and how your business has to change to be more accurate? >> i think the number one thing, we haven't talked about, the number one thing that helped explain why the polls were off is that we vote. imated the women's you talked how the electorate was 72% or 75% white, it was more white, it was older and less female. many of the pollsters i think accounted for it being older. many of the pollsters accounted for it being more white. most of us did not account for it being less female. >> why not? what went into the thinking? >> for example, in 2010, the electorate was not -- in 1994 it was. in some ways, i'll be interested in your thoughts on this. in some ways the structure of the electorate was 1994 and

2010, the decline among women in 1994, it was so bad, it was called the year of the angry hite man and you had the decline in the proportion of women. we lost yesterday because we had fewer women and because we lost women -- we won women by men by. we lost that's a formula for big defeat. so i think women voters are a big piece of last night's story and when we haven't talked about so much on this panel and a big reason why the polls were off. >> i don't accept the premise that the polls were way off. this is a classic wave election. waves break late. we had the race in tennessee in 1994. he was up by four points a week to go, the tuesday before. we polled through the weekend. by thursday he was up by seven. by saturday he was up by nine and he won by 14 percentage points. you would never have caught that unless you polled all the

way up to election day. >> even polling through the weekend is -- >> if you look at the polls over the last week, it was very clear that where democrats were leading like new hampshire and north carolina, the leads were narrowing. and where republicans were leading like iowa, like colorado, like arkansas, the leads were widening. the trend was there clearly and i think what happened was a classic wave where you came in very late within the course of the last week and you ended up getting a substantial republican -- >> all of the persuadeables went one way. >> exactly, that's a wave where you have a lot of relatively close states that go the same direction. >> i agree with whit on that as well. i also think in the electorate, 52% female. >> can you quickly, policywise, why women stayed home, what did the democrat party do wrong or

the republican party them home? >> i think the number one thing is men think it's a good thing when government hasn't done anything bad to you. and there is the challenge for republicans is that women want to get something done and women have two major, major concerns on their minds. incredibly concerned about this economy and the impact it's having on their families and a belief that no one really understood their kitchen table economics and the second thing was the mounting security concerns about the instability. isis, ferguson, ebola. people, women in particular thinking new crisis after new crisis after new crisis of things i've never heard of affecting my family. >> why did that keep them home? >> because i think they felt no one spoke to them. no one gets my life. no one is doing anything for me.